28 replies to this topic

[AVV IT]

There appears to be some confusion here over the term "Moving Traffic Offence". As far as I'm aware, the term refers to those offences in which a vehicle must be moving in order to be committed (i.e. Traffic Light Offences, driving without due care, speeding etc.) you cannot commit these offences whilst a vehicle is stationary. This does not mean that you have to be specifically committing one of these offences in order for the police to pull you over though. There are a whole host of other motoring offences that can be committed regardless of whether a vehicle is moving or not, (Insurance offences, Licencing, Construction and use offences, Lighting regulation Offences etc.) and the Police have the power to pull you over for any such offence. For that matter, there are also a great many non motoring offences for which the Police also have the powers to pull a driver over, under the various forms of "stop and search" legislation.

 

A rear registration plate lamp is classified as an obligatory lamp under the Road Vehicle Lighting regulations 1989. Failure to fit a rear registration plate lamp therefore constitutes a fixed penalty offence (Obligatory lighting equipment not fitted - Conviction Code LR27). If the police suspect you to have committed this offence, then they do have the power to pull you over in order to serve you with a fixed penalty notice for that offence.

 

With regard to the breathalyser issue, under Part I, Section 6, of the Road Traffic act 1988 (Power to Administer Preliminary Tests), the Police have the power to pull over and obtain a breath specimen, if they suspect any driver has consumed alcohol. But they also have the power to obtain a specimen at the scene of a Road Traffic Collision, or if a moving traffic offence has been committed, even if they do not suspect alcohol to have been consumed. So, the Police do have the power to pull a driver over for a lighting regulation offence, or any other offence for that matter. However, they would not be able to obtain a breath specimen from the driver purely because they had committed that offence, as it is not a moving traffic offence. If however, having pulled the driver over for a non moving traffic offence, the officer then suspects that alcohol has been consumed (either due to the smell of alcohol or the drivers behavior), the Police then have the power to obtain a specimen.

[mrbridger]

 

 

Remove the number plate light and fail your MOT. While not a moving traffic offence, you require a number plate light. You cannot be stopped while driving or not having a number plate light, but it is still an offence not to have one

You can be stopped by the police if you are driving on a road. 

 

 

 

You cannot be legally stopped and breathalised for having your number plate light out as it is not a moving traffic offence.

 

Who mentioned breath testing?!!! You do NOT have to have committed (or even be suspected of) any offence for the police to stop you.!

Do you seriously believe that a constable can't stop you to check you have a licence/insurance etc until an offence is witnessed....See Sections 163,164  and 165 of The Road Traffic Act if you don't believe me.

Edited by mrbridger, 17 September 2013 - 02:27 PM.

[yeti21586]

https://sites.google...-37-163-164-165

 

 

Section 163

 

Section 163 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 allows a police constable in uniform to stop a mechanically propelled vehicle or a person riding a cycle on a road

 

Section 164

Section 164 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provides constables with a power to require the production of a driving licenceand a certificate of completion of a motorcycle course CBT or state his date of birth

 

Section 165

Section 165 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 creates the power for a constable or vehicle examiner to obtain the names and addresses of drivers and owners of vehicles and require them to produce their certificates of insurance or security or test certificates

 

[Carlos W]

As this has gone completely off topic.

 

to answer the OPs question, you need a numberplate light

[Ivor Badger]

At the time that the stopping for a non working number plate came up followed by a breathaliser, random stops for the breathaliser were not permitted. Thus as the stop for the number plate light was not a moving traffic offence, the stop was classified as illegal and thus random. Thus the stop was invalid, thus the breathaliser test was invalid.

 

This does not detract from the fact that you require a number plate light. You also require white headlamps. So why do you all want to make your car illegal and then complain about officious polive officers. They are bad enough without encouragement.

 

Question. Have you ever met a police officer who didn't know everthing?

[mrbridger]

At the time that the stopping for a non working number plate came up followed by a breathaliser, random stops for the breathaliser were not permitted. Thus as the stop for the number plate light was not a moving traffic offence, the stop was classified as illegal and thus random. Thus the stop was invalid, thus the breathaliser test was invalid.

 

This does not detract from the fact that you require a number plate light. You also require white headlamps. So why do you all want to make your car illegal and then complain about officious polive officers. They are bad enough without encouragement.

 

Question. Have you ever met a police officer who didn't know everthing?

 

You keep referring to 'breathalsing' when it is irrelevent to the OP's question. Clearly since the 1988 RTA, constables could stop you if you were driving on a road without suspecting any offence. 

Please for your own sake understand this...I wouldn't want you to get into a losing argument with an officer (officious, bad or otherwise stereotyped) who had stopped you to check your licence.

[AVV IT]

Ivor Badger, I've already explained in my earlier post about the Police powers to obtain a breath sample under Part I, Section 6, of the Road Traffic act 1988 (Power to Administer Preliminary Tests) that you appear to be referring to. This is largely irrelevant here though, as it only relates to Police powers to stop in order breathalyse, it has nothing at all to do with Police powers to stop for other motoring, and non motoring offences. If you are committing a lighting regulation offence, or any other offence for that matter, the Police do have the power to stop you in order to serve you with a fixed penalty notice, or court summons for that offence. This does not constitute a random stop, as it has nothing at all to do with obtaining a breath sample. I'm afraid that your original post below is therefore not factually correct:

 

 

You cannot be stopped while driving or not having a number plate light

 

What is true, is that the Police do not have the automatic right to obtain a routine breath sample from a driver, just because they have stopped them for not having a rear number plate light. They only have this power if the driver has committed either a moving traffic offence, if they have been involved in a collision, or if they have other cause to suspect them of being under the influence of alcohol. You are correct, in that there have been a number of cases in which the Police have been found to have obtained unlawful breath samples, because they demanded automatic/routine breath samples from drivers who had been stopped for non moving traffic offences and no other reason. In these cases it was the breath sample itself that was deemed unlawful though, not the right to stop for the original offences.

 

So, the bottom line here is that a rear registration lamp is legally required for an MOT, you are committing a lighting regulation offence if you do not have one fitted and the Police do have the power to stop you for that offence. They do not however have the automatic right to breathalyse you once they have stopped you, unless they then suspect you of being under the influence. (However, as CarlosW points out, this is getting somewhat off topic though.) 

[se_juggles]

Ok its a straight up fail but you can get small led lights, drill 2 holes in the boot where the number plate indents and have them shinning over the license plate. Any light is legal as long as its enough to light the plate in the dark. You dont have to have the standard one.

[tiger99]

That is correct, it need not be the official Rover/Lucas number plate light, as long as it provides suitable illumination. I like the look of the LED bolts, but I think you might need about 4 of them.

 

http://www.searolf.com/page47.html

 

Or, if you have the type of boot lid with recess for the number plate, you could probably have some concealed lights shining through windows in the sides of the recess.

 

Just remember that the lights must be white. No other colour is legal.

 

Oh, and unlike most of the other lights, there seems to be no requirement for "E" marking of the number plate lamps so it is largely up to you how you do it.

Edited by tiger99, 17 September 2013 - 05:34 PM.

[Dan]

  The regulation on exactly how it must be lit is very vague.  It simply says 'such that the rear registration plate be adequately illuminated'.  For cars prior to 1985 there is no need for the lamp to be approved by any official body, so as long as there is even light across the plate and you can see it from a reasonable distance it's fine.  For later cars the lamp must be BS or E marked and the test the lamp has to pass to get the marking will include a requirement for how well it lights up the plate.

[megamini_jb]

Thought I was on yahoo answer for a minute then. That best answer thing is cool.

[yeti21586]

for more ideas about how to light up your number plate see this thread

 

 

http://www.theminifo...r-plate-lights/

[herdy]

Right then, the LED bolts it is then. Cheers to all for shedding light on the equation.

Thanks a lot folks, Herdy

[tiger99]

Dan, I know about E or e marking for lights, but I was on the VOSA web site tonight for something else, and also had a look through the latest IVA manual, and there doesn't seem to be any mention of e mark for number plate lights, although there is for all the others. Now I don't dispute what you say, as it is reasonable to require some kind of standard, and it would be sensible for an e mark to be required, but it seems that VOSA possibly don't stick to their own rules.

 

The big problem of course is that the level of illumination varies according to where you put the lamp. Its distance from the edge of the number plate would have to be specified. Theoretically there may be legal issues in changing it, but I think that neither Plod nor the MOT tester are going to be too concerned, as long as they can see the plate.